Note that only the
syntactic constraints of the type are required here; other constraints (e.g.
that the value be the name of a declared unparsed entity, for an attribute of
type ENTITY) may come into play if the declared default value is actually used
(an element without a specification for this attribute occurs)will be reported by a validating
parser only if an element without a specification for this attribute
actually occurs.

Amend list item 4 of the "Element Valid" validity contraint so that it reads:

The declaration matches ANY, and the content (after
replacing any entity references with their replacement text) consists of
character data, CDATA
sections, comments, PIs
and child elements
whose types have been declared.

Rationale

The spec was not clear that CDATA sections, comments and PIs may occur in elements with
content models Mixed and ANY. Section 2.5 says that "Comments MAY appear anywhere in a document outside other markup".
Section 2.7 says that "CDATA sections MAY occur anywhere character data may occur". The case
for PIs is a little bit less clear, but is supported by the wording for Mixed in this VC, by
the equal treatment of PIs and Comments in productions [27] Misc and [29] markupdecl,
as well as by widespread practice.

Errata as of 2004-06-23

E01

The
language specified byxml:lang
is considered to
applies
to
all attributes and content of the element where it is specified
(including the values of its attributes), and to all elements in its content unless
overridden with
another instance of xml:lang
on another element within
that content. In particular, the empty value of xml:lang is used on an element B to override
a specification of xml:lang on an enclosing element A, without specifying another language. Within B,
it is considered that there is no language information available, just as if xml:lang had not been specified
on B or any of its ancestors.
Applications determine which of an element's attribute values
and which parts of its character content, if any, are treated as language-dependent values described by xml:lang.

Rationale

The original text confusingly used the word "intent" and the phrase "is considered
to". The new text clarifies that xml:lang specifies a language, but
also makes it clear that applications may ignore the specification when not relevant.

The same correction was published for the XML 1.1 specification as
E03.